A problem with the "Eddowes Shawl" DNA match

[mickreed]

The really weird bit is he seems ready to admit that he's a Pom. Just no accounting.

If I wasn't a Pom, how could I whinge?

[mickreed]

Is the 315.1C only stated incorrectly in RE's book, or does it appear elsewhere in statements from JL?
Just wondering if this is a case of RE not interpreting/logging the data correctly rather than JL making a huge scientific mistake..

Amanda

Hi Amanda,

As I said the reference to 314.1C, and its rarity, seems to come directly from JL. Were he to have given it its correct nomenclature 315.1C then nothing else would follow and there would be no case, so in this instance, I think RE is quoting the scientific 'evidence' correctly.

There is still the possibility, I suppose, that JL in trying to dumb everything down for RE, which would be reasonable, and in so doing, came up with a form of words that completely misled everyone.

I can't see how this could be though. The reference to 314.1C and the consequent 'global private mutation' can surely only mean one thing.

[mickreed]

And if you read the very first post in this thread, by Chris, you'll see that what we have learned from Haplogrep and Phylotree is exactly what Chris was saying at the beginning.

Over 300 posts and a lot of bandwidth, and we are where we started. Except that now, some may believe us.

Well done, Chris, Debs, and (I nearly forgot) Trace.

[Amanda]

Got it

And if you read the very first post in this thread, by Chris, you'll see that what we have learned from Haplogrep and Phylotree is exactly what Chris was saying at the beginning.

Over 300 posts and a lot of bandwidth, and we are where we started. Except that now, some may believe us.

Well done, Chris, Debs, and (I nearly forgot) Trace.

Hi Mick,
Yes, I've read the posts from Chris, Debs & Tracey. It certainly seems that both JL & RE have some questions to answer.

I bet Alan Titchmarsh isn't the only person kicking himself...

Amanda

[RockySullivan]

I say take the evidence to the daily mail. The only thing that might sell more papers than "solved jack the ripper" is a case of a desperate jtr gift shop owner & a scientist who come up with a scam where they fake dna and trick everyone into thinking they solved the most famous case of all time. I can already see the movie...jack the fibber

[Peter Griffith aka gryff]

But it's all to do with proteins. At the relevant bits the base sequence against which we are all measured, known as the rCRS, has five successive bits of the protein, cytosine, called C for short.

Err ... um .. no.

Cytosine is one of the four main bases that are the building blocks of DNA and RNA. On the other hand, proteins, like DNA and RNA are very complex polymeric structures necessary for life, but are made from amino acids

cheers, gryff

[mickreed]

Err ... um .. no.

Cytosine is one of the four main bases that are the building blocks of DNA and RNA. On the other hand, proteins, like DNA and RNA are very complex polymeric structures necessary for life, but are made from amino acids

cheers, gryff

Yes, that's right Gryff.

Trying is use simple words can get you in the mire. DNA to RNA to Protein I think. But I ain't real clued up on this. Just the bit about 315.1C, and that's thanks to Chris.

[John G]

Yes, that's right Gryff.

Trying is use simple words can get you in the mire. DNA to RNA to Protein I think. But I ain't real clued up on this. Just the bit about 315.1C, and that's thanks to Chris.

Hi Mick,

23 amino acids have been identified but only 20 are utilized in protein synthesis. Thus, messenger RNA leaves the nucleus and attaches to ribosomes in the rough endoplasmic reticulum (known as rough ER because it is studded with ribosomes, therefore giving it a "rough"- looking surface appearance under an electron microscope).

In a process known as translation the ribosomes read and decode the information carried on mRNA. The ribosomes then assemble amino acids, delivered and held in position by two tRNA molecules, in an order determined by mRNA, the sequence determining the specific protein to be synthesized. Thus, amino acids are linked together in a growing polypeptide chain and the completed polypeptide is then exported to the cytoplasm where it forms a functional protein.

Hope this helps!

John

[tji]

[QUOTE]

Hi cd. This is a trivial point in this discussion, but I always put 'mutation' in quotes in this context. It implies that the DNA has changed in some way from the original. Really it's a deviation from the reference sequence. So far as I understand it, scientists at some point analysed the mtdna of a single person, and used that as, what you might call, the standard for measurement (rCRS). The mtDNA of other people is described by means of its differences from that standard.

Not sure if I am helping but I found it easier to look at it like this when trying to read up on it all. It can get a little confusing as is you have 2 word's that seem to interact, mutation and polymorphism.

It will be described as a mutation if it is a rare sequence (as Dr L states 314.1C would be.)

If it is a common sequence it is described as a polymorphism. (like 315.1C is)

Mick is correct in saying there was an initial experiment done years ago in which mtdna is checked against nowadays but I believe it was for 147 people in the original experiment not just 1 if I remember correctly. (there is a chance I don't )

As the scientist from Phylotree noted, the rCRS has only five Cs at the relevant point whereas almost all of us have six. This difference (that is, the additional C) is correctly described as 315.1C but RE/JL seem to have described as 314.1C - hence all the confusion.

Also the .1 is there to show us that there has been an insertion, a change from the base sequence. (Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine, Thymine) So we know that here an insertion of the cytosine compound has replaced one of the other 3.

And if you read the very first post in this thread, by Chris, you'll see that what we have learned from Haplogrep and Phylotree is exactly what Chris was saying at the beginning.

I bet we were all surprised to discover Chris was right
(sorry Chris just teasing lol)

Well done, Chris, Debs, and (I nearly forgot) Trace.

I have to say I feel so loved and needed on the board's this last few days!


Tracy

[tji]

[QUOTE]

Hi Mick,

23 amino acids have been identified but only 20 are utilized in protein synthesis. Thus, messenger RNA leaves the nucleus and attaches to ribosomes in the rough endoplasmic reticulum (known as rough ER because it is studded with ribosomes, therefore giving it a "rough"- looking surface appearance under an electron microscope).

In a process known as translation the ribosomes read and decode the information carried on mRNA. The ribosomes then assemble amino acids, delivered and held in position by two tRNA molecules, in an order determined by mRNA, the sequence determining the specific protein to be synthesized. Thus, amino acids are linked together in a growing polypeptide chain and the completed polypeptide is then exported to the cytoplasm where it forms a functional protein.

erm thanks for sharing this knowledge John, just going to fetch my dictionary ;0)

Tracy

[Chris]

Also the .1 is there to show us that there has been an insertion, a change from the base sequence. (Adenine, Guanine, Cytosine, Thymine) So we know that here an insertion of the cytosine compound has replaced one of the other 3.

Actually, we're talking about an insertion rather than a substitution, aren't we? So that an extra cytosine has been inserted in the sequence, in addition to the five that are present in the reference sequence.

[tji]

I was definitely talking about an insertion Chris - what did I do....?

Edited - just saw you quoted my mistake lol - hey it's Sunday!

Yes I did go off on a tangent didn't I.

So yes what I have said above is correct for a substitution in a sequence, but as Chris rightly points out the shawl dna is a case of an insertion not a substituiton so it is a lot more simple, the cytosine sequence has one added cytosine. No changes to the compound. It was always a cytosine base.

[mickreed]

Hi Mick,

23 amino acids have been identified but only 20 are utilized in protein synthesis. Thus, messenger RNA leaves the nucleus and attaches to ribosomes in the rough endoplasmic reticulum (known as rough ER because it is studded with ribosomes, therefore giving it a "rough"- looking surface appearance under an electron microscope).

In a process known as translation the ribosomes read and decode the information carried on mRNA. The ribosomes then assemble amino acids, delivered and held in position by two tRNA molecules, in an order determined by mRNA, the sequence determining the specific protein to be synthesized. Thus, amino acids are linked together in a growing polypeptide chain and the completed polypeptide is then exported to the cytoplasm where it forms a functional protein.

Hope this helps!

John

Hi John,

Thanks. I'm now finding myself in the same place that CD did earlier - the place called 'Blimey, where am I?'

At present I only know about Nos. 310 to 316 in this street, and how 8 houses got into seven numbers.

Must find out about the rest of the street(s).

[John G]

[QUOTE=tji;313960]

erm thanks for sharing this knowledge John, just going to fetch my dictionary ;0)

Tracy

Yes, I like to be thorough!

[John G]

Hi John,

Thanks. I'm now finding myself in the same place that CD did earlier - the place called 'Blimey, where am I?'

At present I only know about Nos. 310 to 316 in this street, and how 8 houses got into seven numbers.

Must find out about the rest of the street(s).

Hi Mick,

Yes, I think this thread started to confuse me several weeks ago! Nonetheless, considering the degree of detail, I'm beginning to think that I must have had lot of time on my hands when I submitted my last post!

Seriously, though, I think that you and Chris have done excellent work and statements made by Dr Jari L and Russell Edwards, regarding the shawl and DNA evidence, and some of the conclusion they drew, are now clearly seriously undermined.

Incidentally, from what now seems millennia ago, I seem to remember that Dr Jari L stated in a radio interview that he had intended to check the shawl for genomic DNA but was unable to do so before the book publishing deadline. Do you know if this is a project he still intends to pursue?

Cheers,

John